- This topic has 10 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Can cars be camera shy? A question of parking paparazzi comes this week comes from a Flat Chat regular who wonders if he’s been breaking the law in his long-running campaign to drive off rogue parkers.
A friend of StrataGuru Struggler, fighting a lone battle against cars left illegally in visitors spots and along his driveway, was caught taking pictures of the offending vehicles after Fair Trading told him photographic evidence would help in a case at the CTTT.
“The owner of the car said that it was illegal to take photos,” says Struggler. “I have also taken photos of rogue parkers here in my complex. No people, just the cars and the rego plates … it has worked as they have made themselves scarce and are parking in their own spaces or on the street.
“So can anyone tell me and my friend if taking photos is in fact illegal?”
Taking pictures of vehicles parked on common property is not against the law. If taking pictures of people, never mind cars, in public places was illegal, Shane Warne and Liz Hurley would have no one to swear at.
It is illegal to record speech without the participants knowledge and permission – which is why you get that little warning that you are being recorded “for training purposes” every time you call your bank.
Recording people on CCTV (vision only) is, oddly, a lot less controlled and the accepted wisdom is that if you put up signs telling people there are cameras, you are OK. However, you could be in trouble if the video cameras point at or into private property.
As far as pictures go, you could put up a sign saying “Cars parked illegally will be photographed for evidence of breaches of by-laws”, which will cover any legal loopholes and might even work as a deterrent.
NB: if you’re using a digital camera, make sure the pictures are accurately date-stamped. And, hey, if you get caught in the act, just say you’re taking pictures for training purposes.
You can see the whole picture and read the whole story HERE.
The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
-
Replies
-
We sympathise with StrataGuru Struggler (reported by Jimmy Thomson in his article in Domain in the Sydney Morning Herald on 29 January 2013) and the desperate measures that have to be undertaken by frustrated owners faced with cars parked on common property in breach of the by-laws. In our experience, some of those illegal parkers are in fact owners or occupiers in the strata or community scheme itself; but we have seen a number of instances where the illegal parkers have no relationship to the strata or community scheme at all. What generally attracts these people is the proximity of the strata or community scheme to a transport hub, be it train or bus, or the local shopping strip, restaurant, café or pub.
We have long advocated that owners corporations must be empowered to remove or wheel-clamp illegally parked cars. To achieve this requires a very simple amendment to either the Local Government Act 1993 or the Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 (and its counterpart Community Land Management Act 1989) to exempt strata and community schemes from the prohibitions against wheel-clamping and towing of illegally parked vehicles.
We think that there should be some qualification to guard against vexatious abuse of wheel-clamping and tow-away powers. That can be done by requiring the owners corporation to issue at least one warning (which could be done by means of a notice on the windshield or affixed to the driver’s side window) coupled with prominent display of signs warning that cars parked illegally will be wheel-clamped or towed. Then if the vehicle is not removed, or is parked again on the common property, the owners corporation should have the power to wheel clamp and/or have it towed away.
Currently we can achieve part of that by means of a by-law; but only owners and occupiers are bound by the by-laws – visitors are not.
The ability to wheel clamp a vehicle should not be dependent upon whether or not the owner of the vehicle is an owner, occupier or visitor to the strata or community scheme. Any vehicle that is parked illegally on common property should be susceptible to being wheel-clamped or towed.
You’d only have to do it once or twice in a year – the sight of a wheel-clamp affixed to an offending vehicle would not only concentrate the mind of the offending owner but serve as a very clear warning to others.
It’s not illegal to take a photograph of a motor vehicle in common property, although it’s private land. It becomes illegal if used for commercial purposes, etc. As evidence, it’s not illegal.
I would ask the person saying “it’s illegal” to show you where in the legislation is states this. The fact is, it doesn’t, but ask anyway.
I have been told before that a complex can have a by law drawn up to clamp or tow cars parked “illegally”. Such a by law would need approval of the majority of owners in the complex. But that doesn’t help my friend as out of 16 residences, approx 12 park wherever they want, including some EC members.
Even in my complex which pales in comparison with my friends the majority of owners have .made regular use of the visitors car spots. Some more than others. A by law would not get through here. Though I am lucky. The rumor network is alive and well here, with the residents concerned that I am taking photos and details to take further action. The rogue parker’s here are obvious in their absence.
Residents parking in the Visitor Parking Bays leaves them open to action being taken against them via conciliation and adjudication by unhappy residents. Visitor parking bays are a requirement of the council before they will approve the development and the Strata CANNOT vote them out of existence even with a bylaw as the bylaw would conflict with council planning and so be invalid.
Nobody has gone to Adjudication in NSW using this argument but it is accepted in QLD and every ruling refuses to allow residents to use the visitor parking bays for ANYTHING other than for visitors. The same should apply in all states as the principle is the same.
The only way to use Visitor Parking bays for other purposes is to get the council to revoke their initial requirement for x no of visitor parking bays.
The problem is not with a by law to vote out visitors parking spots but to get all to agree to a by law to tow cars parked in the visitors spots away at owners expense.
Residents here, even those who complain about the rogue parker’s, would not vote for a by law to clamp or tow cars because they park there themselves sometimes. So no owners here would take a resident on over parking. No one but me.
You buy a place with one car spot, you can park one car. You have two car spots you can park two cars. It isn’t rocket science. If you want to park cars anywhere but your garage or on the street, then you should buy a house. You can fill the whole your own lawn up with parked cars, kill your own grass, damage your own gardens and then have to pay from your own pocket to have it fixed.
@struggler said:
The problem is not with a by law to vote out visitors parking spots but to get all to agree to a by law to tow cars parked in the visitors spots away at owners expense.I totally agree with your sentiment but with half the owners ignoreing the parking bylaw you have no chance of getting a new bylaw passed to tow or clamp so you have to attack the problem from a different perspective.
My soloution is the only legal option open to you (as far as I know), you might be able to include multiple respondents or even the whole strata for ignoreing the parking bylaw. In QLD the Strata have a legal duty to enfore the bylaws and so you can take action against the strata but this is lacking in NSW.
Well my car parking photographer friend has now amassed enough photos to have his own exhibition. Owners and residents are up in arms over their long standing cosy unofficial arrangement being challenged. Those who make their own parking arrangements have started up a movement to allow them to keep parking wherever they want. It would see that the rogue parkers are in the majority.
It looks like heading to an EGM. Can the majority vote to allow themselves to park on common property? Should there be an exclusive use clause for each unit and their respective parker? Should there be a risk assessment done to investigate the access to residents and emergency services vehicles (there has already been an accident where a car navigating the obstacle course of cars down the driveway has hit one)? Or can these owners get to increase their parking, despite limiting access for others? Not every unit has the space to allow cars parked in front of garages. To do so would block others getting in and out of their garages or parking in the driveway.
Or should I advise my friend to tr to get the wording that all owners would be allowed to park in the driveway. If he does so there would be a few rogue parkers who am I find they can’t get in or out
@struggler said:Should there be an exclusive use clause for each unit and their respective parker? Should there be a risk assessment done to investigate the access to residents and emergency services vehicles (there has already been an accident where a car navigating the obstacle course of cars down the driveway has hit one)? Or can these owners get to increase their parking, despite limiting access for others? Not every unit has the space to allow cars parked in front of garages. To do so would block others getting in and out of their garages or parking in the driveway.
Hi Struggler,
My response is to situations where parking on common property is tolerated in our small complex. While is appears different to the issue you have I make the following comments that, I believe, when interpreting by-laws a ‘common sense’ or ‘what is the nuisance’ approach is often best used.
Regarding the questions/comments you ask/make:
1. Should there be a risk assessment done to investigate the access to residents and emergency services vehicles. My view is yes.
2. can these owners get to increase their parking, despite limiting access for others. No
3. Not every unit has the space to allow cars parked in front of garages. To do so would block others getting in and out of their garages or parking in the driveway. If a unit has the space to allow cars parked in front of their own garage and it does’t block others is it tolerated?
I know enforcement of the rule “No parking by anyone” is clear cut but it is not always that simple. In our complex there are a couple of units where occupiers can park directly outside their garage and this does not disadvantage or restrict others of access to their garages. Despite this occupiers of units where parking outside their garage would hinder access by other occupiers sometimes complain that as they can’t park on the common property directly outside their garage no one else should be able to do so. I find this view a bit selfish. Sometimes there are natural consequences of buying a unit in a certain location be those conseqences, view, noise or parking.
An alternative is to grant the users who have the space in front of their garage (or elsewhere) permission to park their, subject to them paying a fee to the Admin fund (maybe $100 / month). This allows you to control the situation and reduce the admin fees for everyone.
If you have a majority of owners who are rogue parkers this is a non starter as you would never get the motion passed at an general meeting as I believe it would just require a simple majority to implement.
Most bylaws have something similar to this
2. VEHICLES
(l) The occupier of a lot must not, without the body Corporate’s written approval:-
(a) park a vehicle, allow a vehicle to stand on the common property; or
Cosmo, I actually find the residents who believe they have the space to park outside their garage a bit selfish. Why should they get to use a piece of common property exclusively without cost when those who can’t park outside their garages put in via their levies to maintain common property which, with cars parked there, could have ore wear and tear perhaps than other areas (for example tyre marks, oil stains and damage to garage doors which has happened here when someone parked then didn’t do a good handbrake release).
In the case of my friend, these cars not only cause problems getting around them, but there are cars parked there when he goes to work and when he comes home, so he doesn’t get to use those areas, can’t use the space infront of his, so why shouldn’t he feel that it isn’t right? If people want to use it, they should have to pay more! And I believe that if you allow someone to use common property just because you can, then you open a can of worms because everyone will use some common property without permissions or cost and you might find it difficult to take one to task when you haven’t questioned another. That is exactly what I indeed to do to my EC if they pull me up when they haven’t bothered with anyone else.
Am all for common property being used if the user pays for the privilege.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.